------------------------------------------7/03 -Bill Stinnett writes ...Mr. Niednagel -There is an evolutionist who claims that in the article Looking For Change, the statement, "the Wollemi pine was 'previously known only from fossils dated at around 150 million years' " is "patently wrong!" He says, "The so-called pine is unknown in the fossil record. Pollen superficially resembling Wollemi pine pollen is in the fossil record but paleobotanists have not discovered vegetative fossils resembling this new monotypic genus." Is he right?
------------------------------------------

Thank you for this interesting question. To begin, even if what this fellow espouses were true, it is an entirely insignificant point. "Living fossils" (animals or plants still alive after millions of years) exist all around the world, from the coelacanth to the crocodile to what have you.

In any case, probably the best site that deals with the Wollemi Pine is the Royal Botanic Gardens And Domain Trust website of Sydney, Australia. Here you will find all that you could possibly ever want to know about this infamous "Dinosaur Tree."

The person who made this comment to you is clearly insinuating that he doesn't believe that the Wollemi Pine is a living fossil. He is, by doing this, going against a host of qualified scientists and the overall establishment who believe it to be just that (although I also go against them in other respects).

The aforementioned website begins with the following statement: 'Dinosaur tree’ or ‘living fossil’, the Wollemi Pine is certainly one of the greatest botanical discoveries of our time.

Under facts and figures, under Distribution of fossil remains of Wollemia, it reads: Widespread, including Australia, New Zealand and Antarctica. Below, under Estimated age / lineage, it reads again: 90–200 million years, based on a combination of fossil evidence, known evolutionary relationships of the two genera, biogeography and known timing of the Continental Drift.

So as can be seen, they base their information, as our article did, on fossils, along with other evidences. Therefore, the information in Looking For Change is simply not "patently wrong."

Lastly, I'll repeat that this contention to begin with is rather pointless, as the Wollemi Pine is only one of many examples of a living fossil.Thanks for writing,

Cryptozoology - The study of the hidden animal world, cryptozoology is a science of speculation and surprise, involving the search for animals thought to be extinct to new creatures never before identified.

Creation vs Evolution - What was popularized in 1859 by former Christian turned agnostic, Charles Darwin, has in our day become one of the most hotly contested and sharply dividing issues to be found anywhere.

Dinosaurs - Considerable controversy surrounds dinosaurs, from their place in history to their color, habits, and overall physiology. As viewpoints collide, the search for answers continues.